GRAND RAPIDS, MI -- Facebook and other social media websites are a bit like a high-tech purse or briefcase, storing our personal information and business communications, as well as religious, familial, and political preferences, said Jeff Wiggins.

Wiggins and Mary Tabin, an employment attorney with Grand Rapids law firm Rhoades McKee, took part in live chat with MLive readers about social media and employee rights.

“We would think it to be utterly ridiculous if a potential employer said, "Let me look in your purse so I can see what kind of person you are’,” said Wiggins. “Why should we allow a similar invasion of privacy to occur simply because the barrier is electronic, rather than physical?”

• Wiggins noted that Nesbitt’s bill “does not prohibit employers or educational institutions from searching the web for information about an applicant or employee. The goal of the legislation was to keep private information private. For example, if you place certain settings on your Facebook or Twitter account, any information that requires your password to view, without your consent, would be protected under this bill.”

• Tabin advises her clients not to use Google and other social media sites for background checks of applicants. It's not illegal but it could make employers vulnerable to discrimination lawsuits, she said.

“Electronically accessing public information on the internet is not per se unlawful. However, there are hidden pitfalls in doing so. For example, an employer might discover information that it would not be allowed to ask about in a job interview (i.e. the job applicant is pregnant, has a medical condition, age, etc.). Once the information is known to the employer, that employer will have the burden of showing that it did not use the protected characteristic in making its hiring decision. Plus, information available on the internet is hard to verify.”

• In response to MLive reader Franco's question asking if companies could get around the liability issues by hiring a third party to do the online snooping, Tabin said “So a company could use another company to ‘google’ someone because it is lawful either way. However, an employer should not use an outside recruiting firm to access personal internet accounts.”

&bull: MLive reader Greg Y shared that there “are some persons, many in IT, who don't have a FB account due to privacy concerns. Are these persons considered Luddites to some employers?”

Not necessarily, said Tabin. “Greg, in my experience that hasn't been the case. Employers have not used the fact that an employee doesn't have a Facebook account against them. There are many reasons, and you mentioned one of them, why individuals do not have Facebook accounts.”

• MLive reader Jeff K asked what “What if you just lie and say you don’t currently subscribe to facebook, is that something that could come back to harm you?”

Not a good idea, says Tabin: “My advice is not to lie to your employer because that impacts other laws that could be used against the employee. I would rather the employee refuse to answer the question as opposed to lying."